Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
Wait a minute...I thought "balance" was to be determined before the battle started. If you're looking for equality of outcome that's an entirely different animal.
Wait a minute...I thought "balance" was to be determined before the battle started. If you're looking for equality of outcome that's an entirely different animal.
@Graviton, I can agree with that 100%. But don't forget to apply the old programming axiom of garbage in = garbage out.
I your comment because one can apply some simple logic to it.
Take two groups of guilds A and B and give each a relative stength then if the matchup is balanced or not.
A= Strong vs B = Strong = balanced
A= Weak vs B=Weak = balanced
A=Strong vs B=Weak = unbalanced
A=Weak vs B=Strong = unbalanced
For the input of balanced, the outcome is unknown (a good time and a good fight)
For the input of unbalanced, there are two possble combinations. If A>B, then A. If B>A, then B. Then it is a matter of whether you are a part of guild A or B.
My point was that a screenshot of a GBG season outcome doesn't contribute anything to this discussion. We have no idea of the "balance" going into the result you posted. Those guilds could've been very evenly matched (based on what criteria, I still don't know), and the result shown could be a product of relative activity this round. Which can have little to no bearing on how active a guild will be next round.
My point was that a screenshot of a GBG season outcome doesn't contribute anything to this discussion. We have no idea of the "balance" going into the result you posted. Those guilds could've been very evenly matched (based on what criteria, I still don't know), and the result shown could be a product of relative activity this round. Which can have little to no bearing on how active a guild will be next round.
That is not "a screenshot of a GBG season outcome". That is the current status of the map this season. I could post daily updates if you would like to see a trend. Though I doubt the map will look much different over each of the next 9 days.
You are correct, and I will agree, a screenshot of the map does not highlight specifically or only the balance of the matchup because it also shows the impact of alliances, who is in and who is out.
If yellow and green are able to keep their coordination, the other 5 pinned guilds are stuck for the season. With that there is not reason for the 5 pinned guilds to spend a single diamond for the next 9 days. There is a high likelihood that none of the guilds will have any motiviation, logical need, or reason to spend any diamonds this season. An example:
If we take A3V, we could build a SC and expedite it. But to what end? What are we going to attack?
The options are A3X, D3Z, and A2S. All four sectors open within 10 minutes of each other. By the time we take A3V, green will have softlocked the other 3. When we try to take any of the next options, They will get closed. Since A3V will open first, it is guaranteed we will lose A3V. Why spend any diamonds on expediting a building that can barely be used. To quantify 'barely used' let's do some quick math: take A3V with 160 attacks plus then attack 3 sectors reaching 159 before they are closed is a total of 637 attacks. 637 attacks with 70 members is an average of 9 per member (without an SC culminating in an attrition of 9). Or another way. 637 attacks with a few members each doing 10 attacks (thus 10 attrition) only requires 64 members. This cycle will repeat every 8-9 hours. This applies to the 5 pinned guilds. What about the 3 working the softlocks? They are able to make the soft locks and lock the sectors at their pace, there is no need or reason for them to expedite buildings. Continuing with the example. Buildings on D2T are already built. When green takes D3Z they have 4 hours before A3V opens and it opens after D3Z. The clock is in green's favor to not expedite any building on D3Z with diamonds. Same applies to A3X and A2S.
That is not "a screenshot of a GBG season outcome". That is the current status of the map this season. I could post daily updates if you would like to see a trend. Though I doubt the map will look much different over each of the next 9 days.
You are correct, and I will agree, a screenshot of the map does not highlight specifically or only the balance of the matchup because it also shows the impact of alliances, who is in and who is out.
before A3V opens and it opens after D3Z. The clock is in green's favor to not expedite any building on D3Z with diamonds. Same applies to A3X and A2S.
I'm in a top 10 guild on Birka. When things are going well, we typically shift between the top tier and second tier of Diamond League. After a season where one of the top two guilds made a point of repeatedly squishing us flat, our next map was second-tier Platinum. Which was mind-numbingly boring. We set up swaps with the fastest guilds there, and were lucky if they turned over their 0-attrition tiles once or twice a day. The other guilds felt like we were being greedy, while our folks were bored and starving, to the point that we ended up losing some. I'm pretty sure that was a frustrating, un-fun GBG season for every player in all seven guilds on that map.
I suspect that historical data further back than the most recent season isn't included in Inno's algorithms for determining map placement.
You don't have to suspect. It isn't. Period. It is solely based on LP. Start from the top, gather enough guilds together to make a map of of 5-8 guilds and move downwards.
The only vague aspect "history" involved is the accrual of league points, which leads to win-to-advance not improve-to-advance.
The options are A3X, D3Z, and A2S. All four sectors open within 10 minutes of each other. By the time we take A3V, green will have softlocked the other 3.
this is the problem-- your guild cant take 1 sector before the other guild finishes soft-lock 3 tiles. and if you cant see it and wanna keep blaming the system then... I guess I cant communicate with you no more
That's odd because I'm pretty sure I mentioned the other guild will softlock the other 3 by the time we take the first one. Let me look...oh...there it is.
The options are A3X, D3Z, and A2S. All four sectors open within 10 minutes of each other. By the time we take A3V, green will have softlocked the other 3.
Alliances allow this to happen
As alliances have been noted as one of the issues with GBG and alliances are "allowed" by "the system". This is not blaming the system. Just providing evidence to its flaws. In this situation, if green and yellow maintain their coordination (their alliance) there is nothing the other 5 guilds can do. They will never capture more than 4 sectors at any one time and/or for more than 4 hours.
That's odd because I'm pretty sure I mentioned the other guild will softlock the other 3 by the time we take the first one. Let me look...oh...there it is.
Alliances allow this to happen View attachment 18404
As alliances have been noted as one of the issues with GBG and alliances are "allowed" by "the system". This is not blaming the system. Just providing evidence to its flaws. In this situation, if green and yellow maintain their coordination (their alliance) there is nothing the other 5 guilds can do. They will never capture more than 4 sectors at any one time and/or for more than 4 hours.
Or are you to set in your way of thinking you cannot consider or incorporate ideas from others? I agree with @Graviton, the picture by itself cannot be used as the sole indicator as to the quality of the match up. But it does indicate the quality should be questioned and reviewed. The second image more clearly indicates the impact of alliances. Even the strongest guild in all of the worlds cannot breakout of this situation. It is mathematically (technically temporally) impossible so long as green and yellow do not foul up the softlocks.
If it is not a poor match up (your post #562) and it is not alliances (your post #574), then please provide other possibilities.
It ain't just one thread. In the 18 months we've known about GBG there have been dozens of Feedback, Proposal, Forge Hall, General, Ideas, Questions threads with thousands of posts about GBG.
In the 18 months since GBG was first brought to the main game forums there has been more posts about GBG then any other aspect of this game ever, including the previous most complained of aspect, PvP.
So maybe this thread is worthless, but since there has been more posting about GBG then any other aspect of this game, maybe, just maybe there is something worthy of discussion?
A little perspective follows:
The most complained about aspect of Events used to be the bad 3 Quests, Scout a Province, Take a Province, Research a Tech. It only took a bunch of complaints) quite often called worthless) in Feedback threads for about 3 years for INNO to add in alternate Quests and vastly reduce the use of the bad 3.
PvP has been part of this game for years. It's also been the most complained about aspect of the game until recently.
But for all you new folk the complaining was a lot worse before INNO made two changes.
Seems that for the first years of the game the way hoods were made up routinely put players in vastly different Eras in the same hood. It wasn't unusual for there to be spreads of 6 or more Eras in the same hood.
There were lots of threads, thousands of posts complaining about it. Including a lot of posts saying that the threads were worthless.
It took INNO years to make the change of aligning hoods by Tech Tree placement.
It took INNO a couple more years to remove PvP from BA and early IA.
I wonder how long it would have taken INNO to make the changes if all those 'worthless' threads had not been made?
I think that this thread while naturally obeying Sturgeon's Law does have some good stuff going on.
Namely some smart folk thinking (and arguing) about something that may be a problem of the game.
I don't have much else to say at this point, just that some of the things posted here have got me doin' a bit of thinking. We'll see where that goes.
I don't think so. Not much explanation would be needed from Inno side other than patch notes that victory points now factor into next season matchmaking, only at the top end of Diamond. Coding wise its an easy If>Then formula. If you have (just picking a number here) 500 guilds per server in GBG, and 32 are at 1000 LP level, spread over 4 instances, only 16 guilds would be affected (the top 4 in each of those instances), and affected only in the sense that for *them* the matchmaking algrorhtym would be tweaked to ensure better chances of them being paired with guilds of comparable strength.
This following is representative of a few posts I've noted in this thread in the last couple weeks and in other threads over the years.
It ain't just one thread. In the 18 months we've known about GBG there have been dozens of Feedback, Proposal, Forge Hall, General, Ideas, Questions threads with thousands of posts about GBG.
In the 18 months since GBG was first brought to the main game forums there has been more posts about GBG then any other aspect of this game ever, including the previous most complained of aspect, PvP.
So maybe this thread is worthless, but since there has been more posting about GBG then any other aspect of this game, maybe, just maybe there is something worthy of discussion?
A little perspective follows:
The most complained about aspect of Events used to be the bad 3 Quests, Scout a Province, Take a Province, Research a Tech. It only took a bunch of complaints) quite often called worthless) in Feedback threads for about 3 years for INNO to add in alternate Quests and vastly reduce the use of the bad 3.
PvP has been part of this game for years. It's also been the most complained about aspect of the game until recently.
But for all you new folk the complaining was a lot worse before INNO made two changes.
Seems that for the first years of the game the way hoods were made up routinely put players in vastly different Eras in the same hood. It wasn't unusual for there to be spreads of 6 or more Eras in the same hood.
There were lots of threads, thousands of posts complaining about it. Including a lot of posts saying that the threads were worthless.
It took INNO years to make the change of aligning hoods by Tech Tree placement.
It took INNO a couple more years to remove PvP from BA and early IA.
I wonder how long it would have taken INNO to make the changes if all those 'worthless' threads had not been made?
I think that this thread while naturally obeying Sturgeon's Law does have some good stuff going on.
Namely some smart folk thinking (and arguing) about something that may be a problem of the game.
I don't have much else to say at this point, just that some of the things posted here have got me doin' a bit of thinking. We'll see where that goes.
This following is representative of a few posts I've noted in this thread in the last couple weeks and in other threads over the years.
It ain't just one thread. In the 18 months we've known about GBG there have been dozens of Feedback, Proposal, Forge Hall, General, Ideas, Questions threads with thousands of posts about GBG.
In the 18 months since GBG was first brought to the main game forums there has been more posts about GBG then any other aspect of this game ever, including the previous most complained of aspect, PvP.
So maybe this thread is worthless, but since there has been more posting about GBG then any other aspect of this game, maybe, just maybe there is something worthy of discussion?
It is the biggest abused part of the game, not even close to fun for many, personally I think they should get rid of it, it is also letting the gap between larger and smaller player grow. Send it to the trash can
